Ok....maybe the post is dumb but I'm just getting off my chest about what I think and what my input is on Diablo 3. WitchDoctor=creative Wizard=creative
I want a more civilized fighter/weapon master.A fighter should not have to be barbaric.
"Hey did you see that barb kill that monster?"
I don't want to leave it the same and get another fighter class/holy person.I
want the barbarian renamed Warrior and also to have another fighter class/holy
person. Like Knight or something...Warrior should replace Barbarian,it's not to
generic The Warrior came from Khanduras, and has "only a minimal magic knowledge
"http://diablo.incgamers.com/gallery/...um/Warrior.jpg[WIKI][WIKI]
|||i gotta tell ya, all these "lets rename....." threads are getting old. bliz obviously had envisioned the barb for a reason so why cant people just enjoy what they are puting out there for us? would a warrior be cool? sure if he had the right skills and back ground story and so forth. will the barb be cool? i dont see why not assuming again he has fun skills and a good background story. i will somewhat agree that the barb should not have been in the game but thats only cause i expected 5 new classes, if i do not get 5 new(i wont) i am fine with that so long as the barb has a reason to return. it has been said that this barb is the barb from D2, well what about the female barb? why is she there? i really hope they give us 10 different back ground stories|||Sure, you could rename the barb, except a bunch of people would be going "the warrior is exactly the same as the barb in D2 but with a different model/name!!!!!!". I mean, they already did this to wizard and somewhat to witch doctor, atleast with barb they just admitted outright that it's the same thing.
And plus, they already used a warrior in D1, so another reason for people to complain about using a "warrior" again. And really, a warrior is just going to seem as goody-good as a paladin/knight.|||I have never read the books, so I could be missing important pieces lore wise, but in the actual game I never really got the impression that Barbarians were really "barbaric" in the typical sense of the word as we view it today. They are described as living in tribes on the fringes of civilization, but not necessarily as crude or stupid. It seems to me that people have kind of given the Barbarian that themselves, rather than Blizzard really inventing him that way. The Barbarian's in game speech (Diablo II) even sounds well educated "I shall meet death head on" being the example that comes to my mind first. I just figured I'd throw that out there since you say a warrior doesn't have to be barbaric, I really don't think the original Barbarian character is all that barbaric* if you go off of just what Blizzard gives us, but we have the connotation of the word from the Germanic barbarian tribes invading Rome etc., and a lot of fan fiction etc. has Barbarians using broken grammar and simple sentences, but that doesn't mean the Barbarian Blizzard has created in Sanctuary is necessarily like that.
Either way, it seems that the Dev team were trying to go with some continuity between Diablo II and III, hence the Barbarian is older as if it is the same character people could play in Diablo II. Changing the name to the Warrior doesn't really accomplish that in the same way, which means key elements of the game most likely make the change unlikely. Plus, I think it is just semantics anyway with the name Warrior verses Barbarian. The Barbarian is a specific type of Warrior hailing from a certain place, I can see if you want a different type of one (With closer to Paladin skillset) but that is a personal opinion that isn't necessarily shared by everyone, plus there could very well be a character revealed that has a skill set more appealing to you (holy fighter class).
One last thing, I never saw the Warriors in the original Diablo as being Holy per se (and I don't believe the lore said much besides that they were soldiers from an army that had recently finished campaigning, which doesn't have any holy-warrior type linkage either), so even going by previous title's Diablo history, the Warrior could just as easily evolve into a Barbarian type fighter as a holy knight type fighter.
*barbaric in the sense of crude or uneducated, which is the way I believe you are using it in your original post. Obviously a Barbarian's name does somewhat imply him as Barbaric, but again, this is Sanctuary, not Earth.
EDIT: One more thing is that I guess with the way Diablo is setup, I just consider Barbarian (In the Diablo II world) to basically be a race of people, and any individual will have it's own personality, where as it seems some people are classifying any warrior or person who is crude, brutish, warlike, as a Barbarian.|||Quote:
EDIT: One more thing is that I guess with the way Diablo is setup, I just consider Barbarian (In the Diablo II world) to basically be a race of people, and any individual will have it's own personality, where as it seems some people are classifying any warrior or person who is crude, brutish, warlike, as a Barbarian.
yeah exactly... Barbarian is just the name of the race... for example a Wizard is just the name but he can be a Summoner, Plague caster, illusionist and other kinds of things i guess.
A barb is really a warrior as soon as he picks up a weapon i guess? i think Qual-Kehk in act5 always calls you a warrior anyway?
and Barbarian sounds meaty man! you instantly think of a stupidy overly powerful angry hulk... warrior is kinda softer sounding!
|||are you crazy??? the barb is perfect!!!|||Quote:i gotta tell ya, all these "lets rename....." threads are getting old. bliz obviously had envisioned the barb for a reason so why cant people just enjoy what they are puting out there for us? would a warrior be cool? sure if he had the right skills and back ground story and so forth. will the barb be cool? i dont see why not assuming again he has fun skills and a good background story.
i will somewhat agree that the barb should not have been in the game but thats only cause i expected 5 new classes, if i do not get 5 new(i wont) i am fine with that so long as the barb has a reason to return. it has been said that this barb is the barb from D2, well what about the female barb? why is she there? i really hope they give us 10 different back ground stories
Man I agree 100% with you. I'm also getting tired of those rename threads.
Stop crying people. In the end you all will be playing D3 all the night and doing the same runs you do in D2. Let's be realists.|||sounds like a bad idea or something... i dont know...maybe the name barbarian should stay. they played an important role in the d2 story line dude.|||Quote:
Man I agree 100% with you. I'm also getting tired of those rename threads.
Stop crying people. In the end you all will be playing D3 all the night and doing the same runs you do in D2. Let's be realists.
exactly. they could go and call him sissy pants mcgee and i would still use the char|||Quote:
and Barbarian sounds meaty man! you instantly think of a stupidy overly powerful angry hulk... warrior is kinda softer sounding!
Yes, just compare "Conan the Barbarian" to "Conan the Warrior".
- FreezBee
No comments:
Post a Comment